Letters to the Senate request hearings on DOE and USPTO.

This past week Cold Fusion Now sent letters to all the US Senators on the Energy Sub-Committee requesting hearings on the Department of Energy’s refusal to acknowledge LENR science as a part of its research funding AND the US Patent Office’s lack of action on LENR technology.

Join us!

These folks here are the designated energy policy makers who need to be educated on the emerging technology that promises clean energy and a 21rst century economy.

Letters are also en route to constituents of Florida, California, Utah, Nevada, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Massachusetts to be postmarked and sent to their Senators’ local offices.

Don’t let this science be ignored while billions are wasted on obsolete non-solutions.

Don’t let this technology be derailed or delayed by excessive regulation.

The possibility of a peaceful future on this planet demands no less than all our effort, no matter how small.

As Infinite Energy magazine approaches its 100th issue, I was flipping through an old issue from 1995 (Volume 1 Number 3), I found this letter to editor Eugene Mallove from then Senator Bob Dole.

Notice “the anonymous contributor” that prompted Senator Dole to write. Perhaps a letter, a book, a conversation, a video, might yet turn on a light today in DC, or your hometown.

The loss of wildlife and marine species, a generation of young people with few opportunities, the elderly living on flyspecks in a world they don’t understand; in a vast universe of potential, is this the best humans can do?

Wow, Doberman, you dog you! Thanks so much for participating.
Your faxes will arrive before the letters, and so we’ll have a 1-2!

It’s hard to say there will be an effect.
I do know that we have to get ahead of the legislators and DIRECT their action, as opposed to them acting, and us following.
We don’t want the Patent Office re-routing LENR applications.
We don’t want years of regulation delaying the implementation of the technology.
It’s gonna hurt, no doubt. But the sooner, the better.

This initial effort is an educational one, but it also pre-supposes an informed public that demands clear action in support of public access to clean energy for millenia of prosperity for all life on Earth.

Are you kidding?? Those US Senators don’t respond…particularly when they aren’t from your state. In fact, I’ve been sending a series of faxes, letters, and emails to my two Minnesota US Senators with virtually no results. Even my US House member (the only Muslim in Congress – Ellison), I’ve been virtually harrassing (given the number of faxes, emails, and letters I’ve sent), and the only result is that his office was calling my home looking for campaign donations.

There is only one way I could get results – give a large campagn donation. Even then, these guys operate within a given ideology, so if the issue isn’t part of their party’s dogma, or again, if I am not recognized as a cash cow for them, then the blow it off. Frankly, it is so sick – to keep myself from getting depressed I just cop the attitude that at least their “tender mercies” don’t consist of trying to stifle it for the sake of their big corporate campaign donators like energy companies or utilities.

Wow, Brad, I’m so glad to hear you’ve been writing your legislators. It doesn’t matter that its ignored now. At some point, the awareness will peak and then, well let’s just hope the action taken is positive.

It was suggested to begin writing media. Newspapers, magazines, TV journalists and reporters. We’ve got to get the word to the general public, so that when the time comes, they’ll be able to Say Yes to Cold Fusion.

The presented evidence from the megawatt demo does not support output
power above 70 kW in the “1 MW reactor”.

The calculation used by Rossi and Fioravanti to claim 470 kW assumes
that essentially all the water pumped through the system is vaporized.

However, there is no evidence presented in the report to support that
assumption.

Rossi collects liquid water at the exit of the reactor, but there is
no evidence presented that liquid cannot be carried past this
collector, entrained in the fast flowing steam, and into the heat
exchanger.

The only measurement reported is the temperature of the fluid as it exits.

This is on average about 105 C, which probably corresponds to the
boiling point inside the conduit at an elevated pressure due to the
formation of some steam.

The fact that no independent measurement was reported of pressure or
steam quality indicates that Fioravanti is no more competent than
Essen and Kallunder were.

If one accepts the notion that above 100 C, the steam is dry, then the
total power transfer is proportional to:

T2-T1 if T2 100

By this calculation, at 100 C, the power transfer is about 65 kW, and
at 100.1 C it is about 470 kW.

The blue line in the attached figure (PowerTransfer.jpg) represents
the result of this calculation for Rossi’s latest data in arbitrary
units. (The plateau would be about 470 kW.)

Or even if you want to claim that the steam is only dry when it
reaches 105 C a few minutes later, then the power would follow the
dashed line.

So Rossi and Fioravanti want us to believe that although it takes 2
hours for the power transfer to reach 65 kW (100C), it takes only a
few minutes to go from 65 kW to 470 kW.

The power transfer to the water is proportional to the temperature
difference between the water and the heating elements.

So this amounts to a claim that the temperature of the heating
elements changes essentially discontinuously by a huge amount, and
exactly when the water begins to boil.

How does it know?

And how does it know to stop increasing essentially as soon as all the
water is vaporized?

If the power increased by another 10%, the steam temperature would
increase to more than 200 C.

Yet it settles in nicely to a fairly constant temperature just above
100 C, just as if regulated by a mixture of phases at the boiling
point, which fluctuates a little because of irregular internal
pressure.

Such a discontinuous change in the temperature is simply not plausible.

A few minutes after it reaches 100 C, the power transfer must still be
quite close to the 65 kW, even as the temperature reaches 105 C.

That means that the temperature is no indication of dry steam, and so
the most we can say from the data presented, if it is accepted, is
that the power output is higher than about 70 kW.

[ Comment by Joshua Cude, after his comment very similar to the post
quoted here. ]

It’s the old steam trick again

In the first place, the report comes from Rossi, with no
identification of the “customer”, so it’s just his word. We had
Rossi’s word yesterday, so there’s nothing new today. And the
amateurish quality of the report is amazing.

In the second place, if you accept the data as given, there is no
verification that the units weren’t pre-heated for any number of hours
through the night. Again, we have only Rossi’s word.

In the 3rd place, he’s back to his old tricks of claiming all the
water is converted to steam, without any measurement provided to
verify it. That gives him a big factor of 8 in the output power.

Remove the factor of 8 for claiming dry steam without evidence, add in
3 or 4 hours of heating during the night, and once again, there is no
evidence for excess heat, let alone heat from nuclear reactions.
That’s if you accept the data that is given.

Rossi has succeeded in prolonging uncertainty again; probably because
certainty would not further his goals.

Warning: This is an advocacy site and will remain free of unfounded accusations and detraction by serial commentators towards working scientists who are actually doing something other than typing will not be tolerated.

I am glad you allowed my post. In December, 1996, then an age 54 home hospice care giver in Santa Fe, New Mexico since 1985, I evolved from being a naive supporter of CF to a pragmatic skeptic, as a scientific layman, providing long commonsense detailed reviews of the details of simple errors in journal articles that claimed successful experiments showing anomalies of excess heat, radiations, and/or transmutations.

I was fairly active until about 1999, and revisit the field when some possible big breakthrough shows up, as I have always welcomed such an exciting and valuable major basic advance in science and technology.

I believe I have rendered a positive service by keeping discussion more thorough and civil, and notice that the debate re Rossi has been very extensive and fairly polite this year.

For months after January I tended to believe it, until skeptics presented simple posts about the role of steam and water coexistence in the throughput — the inevitable remarkably stable steam temperature of the output flow is solid proof that much steam is mixed with a fair amount of water.

So, it is imperative that the exact amount of steam in the throughput be measured.

Horace Heffner on Vortex-L, active proponent of CF for two decades, has labored long to give very earnest critiques of various facets of the very incomplete trail of evidence.